I think the overall concept for this project is pretty cool and very well thought out.
The one part that stands out to me as a weak link is the "reply" vs. "reply to all" mechanism. It seems prone to human errors and to things like vacation messages. How would conflicts be handled (one person rejects and one approves)?
At the very least, I would provide a mechanism that allows changes to be just as easily revoked as they were approved so that late that one night when someone accidentally hits "reply to all" instead of "reply" that they can easily fix it.
Kenny
c) the email will have "reply-to" set to the "allow" action and a continuation ID. and will have the CC: header set to "reject" with the continuation ID. So, by "replying" to the email
d) by hitting "reply", the workflow will approuve the changes
e) by hitting "reply to all", the workflow will reject them with no further action
